Studio 60... what's happening?

The ratings continue to flag for the show, although, an an eerie parallel to the fictitious show, they continue to get a good enough rating in the key demographics to MAYBE keep themselves afloat. I've seen alot written about why the show hasn't done well. Let's dispel some notions right now:

1) Sorkin is reusing material: This is absolutely true, however, it has nothing to do with the ratings. Anyone who's a Sorkin fanatic will notice and not mind (if not love) these moments of rehashed dialogue. Anyone who's not a Sorkin-nut will not even notice (and especially won't care).

2) The show is too insider: Sorkin is very good at connecting the dots for people that aren't insiders. He constantly has characters explaining things that need to be explained (heck, Donna's whole purpose for the first season of West Wing was to do exactly that). Besides, almost every show is "inside" something. People love CSI and it's about as "inside" as you can get.

3) The show takes itself too seriously: I can kind of see the point on this one. The only problem is that almost every show does this to some degree. And the reason noone cares that almost every show does it is because each of us does it for ourselves. My job isn't going to save the world, but it's central to my life and I take it seriously. This is something you don't realize until you're an adult (at least I didn't) but it's the difference between reality and play-acting. If anything, the show is a bit too good at this and it contrasts with how we're used to seeing most shows. We're used to seeing two types of shows: A) Doctor/Lawyer/Crime shows that we expect to have people take themselves seriously and B) sitcoms that are meant to be comedic. Sorkin's Sports Night and Studio 60 span the genres in a way that's a bit uncomfortable for some.

4) The sketches aren't funny: This is another one that I can kind of see but I think is misunderstood. We largely don't see the skeches in the show and the sketches we do see are usually in rehearsal or sort of in the background. The "Modern Major General" parody has been by far the most elaborate one and if anyone didn't find that laugh out loud funny (particularly Paulson's exchange with the conductor) then they need to be checked. I think it's good enough to know that the skits are "going to be" funny and save the skits that we see for either A) Sure fire winners like the musical bit or B) Moments of cameo humour like the Nicholas Cage impersonation we saw in the last episode.

None of those are the real reasons why the show is tanking, however. They might be players in the ratings decline but they're not the main reason. The main thing that I see is that Sorkin clearly has an axe to grind and he's letting it affect his writing. I expected the "Christian Right" subplot to play in the first episode and then fade out, much as it did in West Wing. Unfortunately, the show drug it out in antognizing detail for three episodes and still feels the need to remind us of the tension in episodes 4 and 5. I say all this as an agnostic Sorkin lover, too. I'm not offended and I don't necessarily disagree, but I find it grating (perhaps jarring is a better word).

I'll watch the show as long as it's on the air. I'll PROBABLY buy it on DVD. All I would ask of Aaron Sorkin is that he uses that vaunted intellect (of which he is clearly and rightfully proud) to be a little more circumspect and generic. Heck, he's creating a world, why not go ahead and create the things he wants to mock. Why have a President Bush that you bash when you could bash the fictional President Frank for invading Iran rather than hitting the megolomaniacal crazy Saddam Hussein next door. It might actually force people to talk about your point, rather than being beaten over the head with it.